Well, that's clearly because we don't measure his level at the club level in the same way, not because I give him a very high value to the international stage.
Currently I notice a greater tendency to Zico over Garrincha in more "educated" circles than the common (and I think with overwhelming reasons), while Moreno is even quoted alongside Di Stéfano (or his equivalent in a previous generation), so, yes, he's really a not uncommon possibility. Zico and Moreno are just only usually ignored due to a certain lack of knowledge, ever by only knowing about World Cup winners or by not knowing the previous movement to the 1950's/1960's, when the current continental tournaments at club level appeared (information not so common for most).
We both agreed that zidane and George best achieved roughly the same amount of world class seasons(5 each give or take) You also agree best reached a phenomenon level in 67/68 whilst zidane did not Therefore the tie breaker can only be zidanes NT career Or maybe I misjudged your assessment.do you actually think zidane had a comparable club career to George best If so then why?
Actually, I answered it more accurately in the thread Best football players of all-time: In bold I mean almost exclusively at their level at the club level.
Ah the usual 'the educated vs lack of knowledge' ploy. So educated that he failed to address previous discussions on Zico (by south americans as vegan 10), and where he used to be placed. The truth bearer facade has to be maintained. The educated are here represented by fantasist places with an IQ of 80 while the fools have studied journalism or business at spots as Bologna and Paris. "Only knowing about world cup winners" is again a laughable claim. You should check (you won't) some all-time attempts from the 70s and 80s. I will not enter a discussion with you but since you try to create an elevated position I couldn't restrain myself here, for this instance.
People really seem to put waaaaay to much into opinions of local writers (but for some reason especially in this case, not when Brits or whoever else does it).
And it's usual because it's an element that we should always keep in mind to quote and be guided by references. Who is "he"? and how does that fit into the answer? I think this in absurd idea (or irony). For the context of the topic the difference on the educated opinion and the one that does not is how much research and detail there is in each case and the logic that is used to make comparisons. Nothing about IQ's or specific professions. To be honest, I'm not sure what you're responding to at this point. "Only knowing about World Cup winners" refers to the common opinion that only knows well about the World Cups and restricted their knowledge to them and to the winners, a trend that is common about the most of football spectators. It's not a problem, I always think it's good discuss with you, but as I mentioned you before I think your ideas are somewhat disorganized despite having good backup information and you lose some control when you personalize it.
What is certain is that the comparisons are complicated with Moreno for the time he had to live (with Argentina excluding itself from the World Cup, during the II World War with his European peers without much activity or emaciated and sustained basically just only by a local "golden period" in Argentina and the continental competition). I can understand the doubt, but certainly there are not so few circles that place Moreno so high and referring to opinions of his time. Something happened with him and the way he impacted that didn't happen with all the Argentines of his generation.
Just to briefly point out the issue; A continental competition where Argentina was dominating & winning without him, Brazil was below par (or refused to play, in two of the three tournaments he won) and also Uruguay was in a down phase for much of the 1940s (their 1942 - 1950 results against Brazil and Argentina were piss poor; elo rating clearly lower as the 1920s, 1930s and 1950s). Brazil became much better and better equipped in the 1950s. There was virtually no international competition, but all of this is groundhog day.
I have some issues with that. This seems to be a common occurrence in other countries too. GB is a good example I think. It's known that a lot of oldtimers thought Matthews & Co were superior to the generation that followed with Charlton and Best. And even older writters thought that Matthews, Finney etc can't hold a candle the generation prior to that and so on.... I remember @comme making a post about that, but I can't find it right now. Another thing is Di Stefano only played a small fraction of his career in Argentina, so they might compare Moreno to the young version of Di Stefano and haven't seen him much during his peak. I also noticed based on general comments that players who leave for Europe and play for a NT aren't exactly popular with the locals....
A few more: International Business Times (USA, 2014): 34 sporcle.com (USA, 2018, quiz with countries and playing positions but names blank to fill in): 32 Miguel Delaney (Irish writer for Independent, 2011): 29 David Brooks (UK, 2002): 29 Bleacher Report (USA, 2011): 26 Tim Vigon (UK, 1999): 20 Updated averages: South American average: 44 (only one publication) North American average: 31 European average: 27 Globally compiled average: 32 (IFFHS and PDG BigSoccer) Overall average: 29 Some notable individual rankings: IBT has Zidane at #5 and Maldini at #12. Bleacher has Cruyff #1, Platini #4, Ronaldo (Brazil) #6, Meazza #8, Zarra #16. Delaney has Maradona #1, Garrincha #6, Meazza #10.
Zidane lost the ballon D’Or to Micheal Owen in 2000/01 Bearing in mind this was a striker who never scored 20 PL goals in a single season (in an era where scoring 20 PL goals was common place) From what I’ve personally seen Raul and figo both had their most productive seasons and were on a completely different plateau to Zidane. And there were others aswell(from Serie A Francisco totti was the clear best this season) Personally I think your categorisation of world class is way too inclusive and not strict enough World class can only and should only be the very best performers in the World during any given season George best finished top 10 in the 1969 ballon D’Or for a Manchester United team that finished 11th place in the league I think this guy is totally underrated could you just imagine if he’d been a part of a winning machine like zidanes juventus. Also Let’s not pretend like your assessment is based on anything other than ballon dor placements When Zidane was playing for a mid table struggling team in France he was NO ONE Finishing 25 or 26th place in the ballon D’Or ,failing for his NT,did nothing in the champions league etc (and he was already older than Best in 69) Recognition in the ballon D’Or usually comes when you are part of a winning team (Or at the bare minimum playing for a team that progresses deep into the champions league and is competing for top 4 placements in the league) Zidanes ballon D’Or rankings are totally misleading In 1997/98 2001/02 and 2002/03 he was probably a top 5 player in the World In all other seasons in his career he was inconsistent as hell For Gods sake Zidane finished 5th place in the 2006 ballon D’Or with literally 4 less votes than Ronaldinho So the ballon dor “bible” would actually lead us to believe that Ronaldinho was only marginally better than Zidane in 2005/06 LOL Zidane didn’t even play half of 2006 Andres iniesta and zinedine Zidane are literally the most overrated players in ballon D’Or history bar non(they must get 5 votes for every useless flick or sideway pass)
Yes, it will be a fun exercise to nitpick all those games and find solid reasons/excuses to some of the european losses. But you'll be missing the bigger picture here. This is not a attack at european soccer. All these games are here to give (to complement) a broader context to brazilian soccer history (and to some extent Sudamerican soccer). We are talking about a big number of 138 games with 67 wins to brazilian teams, 38 wins for europeans and 33 ties. A pretty solid record considering that it is 8 Teams from the same country against a whole continent. This shows the depth of talent Brazil had during those decades (50s, 60s and 70s) with different generations spread between a good number of teams. And another extent to this is Brazil's record in WCs [50'-2nd; 54'-5th; 58'-1st; 62'-1st; 66'-11th; 70'-1st; 74'-4th; 78-3rd). And all this also reflects on other sudamerican teams because these same brazilian teams (and generations) played against great teams like Bilardo's Estudiantes, Spencer's Penarol, Esparrago's Nacional, Marzolini's Boca Juniors and many others. None of all those games were for European Champion Clubs' Cup/Champions League, but they must have some value. I think.
Not gonna lie, those were some impressive numbers, and good job in digging them up. However, as back-up for an all-around American superiority or equality in the world of football they're flimsy. As an aside, Placar's view on big clubs is indeed quite weird. Porto was nothing on an European level before the 80s, and Benfica is suspect in many eras, too. Would have been nice to have full results. They probably omitted several clubs that were stronger than Porto. Anyway, the quality of Brazilian football in the 50s and 60s isn't exactly news, though there are factors, like the disastrous NT-tour of '63, that raises questions on exactly how deep the well was. But to draw a parallel on all-around South American quality based on results in the Libertadores or wherever is pushing it. Except for maybe Penarol, none of those teams you mentioned were seen as anything special in Europe. Above average maybe, but any major European nation had teams like those. Estudiantes a great team? Maybe if you want to go on a rampage downtown. I'm surprised people keep mentioning this team as anything but an absolute embarrassment and the shame of football. For a comparison, here's a list of teams that Real Madrid lost to in the EC during the ADS years: Partizan, Rapid Wien, Vasas, Nice, Juventus, Anderlecht, Milan (+the obvious Benfica and Inter). A Real Madrid loss wasn't anything shocking, it happened all the time. Yet I don't see French and Belgians completely infesting the Ballon d'or votes. Uruguayans and Argentinians don't get to coast off Brazilian results any more than the Franco-Belgians get to coast off Real Madrid results. Since we're talking about the bigger picture here. I don't see why it's so difficult to admit it's impossible for three countries to have 50%, or even 30%, of the world's best footballers. Especially when two of them struggled to even make it past the group stage in a WC.
I'm not missing the bigger picture at all. In the same way European teams couldn't care for the Intercontinental Cup (not as much) after the late 60s/early 70s (even today many more South American fans travel to the Club World Cup as European fans), many of those friendlies were played with lopsided motivations and priorities. That is the true bigger picture here. South American (sports) media have always been shameful in manipulating realities and what we would call today 'fake news'. That are harsh words, but it is how it is. They aren't known for their accurate fact keeping. 'El Grafico' derives their title from their playfulness with reality and making things evocative. Those tactics have been well known, they can be without shame in their selectivity when their own teams/guys are concerned. That piece was made with the intention 'look at how good we are' and they typically go at great lengths to do so. The list is very selective in which teams they include, and when. Also this history with 'the truth' when their own guys are concerned is again part of the bigger picture. And yes, sometimes they even do that against each other, so to speak. In 1981 El Grafico was so smart (as commented by World Soccer) to intentionally stage the vote for player of the year before the 1981 IC, so that Zico didn't win this. Typically, when I showed and thoroughly proved in the past Placar themselves did not believe Zico was among the best in the world during the 1970s, this was brushed aside by the usual suspects (with even some insults). Then most of those dudes are suddenly unable to process the words by Placar themselves (as shown: Placar in 1976, 1977 claimed JC14 was the world's best after he had played matches there, and not Zico). ... which I said above a few times (also that Brazil entered #1 in Elo at times & were one of the pre-tournament favorites)....As said by me, they improved drastically in the 1950s. Off the pitch as well Havelange always had a major influence on Brazil’s behalf long before he even got the top job.— Beyond The Last Man (@BeyondTLM) July 2, 2018 https://medium.com/@paalpot75/joão-havelange-the-immortal-emperor-of-world-football-7963084aa3f1
Great Harokin! And your evil conspiracies. I'll try to be as simple and concise with you (Because I know you really well from xtratime forums and to attack south american soccer is one of your favorite hobbies ). Flimsy? It was never my intention to claim an all-around American superiority. I let this perfect clear. It's just to show the depth of south american talents. This evil conspiracy of an all-around American superiority or equality in the world of football is your paranoia only, it is happenning only in your head. Please stop that. We are here just to highlight great players. Here I really do not know what were the factors that they considered. But I think they must have made some kind of all time table. Afterall, Porto has 2 EC titles. That's why i think they made some kind of all time table. Again, I'm not sure. I've posted the all time results against all european teams before. I'll post here again. The advantage still favours the brazilian teams. Overall: 1560 G - 830 W (Brazilian wins) - 344 T - 386 L (European wins) Please explain to me how someone admit a claim that he never made? How? No one here said that it must be 50/50. PerúFC already showed the numbers (percentage) of players in previous posts. It favours Europe. It also favours Europe in all all-time lists posted here. All of that is a clear signal of european superiority. And I have nothing against that. I love european soccer. Just please stop this annoying paranoia of South American superiority. Maybe it was fun in xtratime forums but here is really annoying. The focus of my post was to show the strength of sudamerican soccer. Not it's superiority. That's all.
Yeah well, I love South American soccer more than you love European soccer, so there. There isn't a South American conspiracy, just a South American mentality which is to have a massive chip on your shoulder towards Europe, and to use every imaginable statistic as a crutch to prove it. The Intercontinental Cup, as Puck mentioned, is a favorite. Using IC results to prove anything is like using the old UEFA Super-cup to prove the CWC was stronger than the EC. Unfortunately this relentless online lobbying is wearing down even quality posters and causing them to buy into the illusion. Anyone who questions this utopia is handily dismissed as biased or eurocentric. You don't think this type of poster exist? Just look at the history section on Xtratime, and the legitimate psychos who have turned it into a complete wasteland with their horsecrap threads. You're right, this isn't Xtratime, so there's no need for you to play some bargain-basement Ze Da Fiel in order to discredit me. As for 50/50, yes, it was suggested here as a legitimate ratio. But even a smaller number like one-third would still be completely ridiculous. Happy for you if you're not part of this crew. What ratio would you feel is a fair representation of South Americans in the Ballon nominees?
I continue to summarize the work done by Tom Stevens. After adding the presence of all players from 1930 to 1939, the total result of the decade is as follows: 1.- Sindelar (Austria) 2.- Meazza (Italia) 3.- Sarosi (Hungría) 4.- Erico (Paraguay) 5.- Orsi (Argentina) 6.- Bastin (Inglaterra) 7.- Nejedly (Checoslovaquia) 8.- Ferrari (Italia) Sastre (Argentina) 10.- Hapgood (Inglaterra) 11.- Piola (Italia) 12.- Braine (Bélgica) 13.- Moreno (Argentina) 14.- Avar (Hungría) Ferreyra, Bernabé (Argentina) James, Alex (Inglaterra) Zsengeller (Hungría) 18.- Planicka (Checoslovaquia) 19.- Monti (Argentina) 20.- Andreolo (Uruguay) 21.- Leónidas (Brasil) 22.- Brook (Inglaterra) Nasazzi (Uruguay) 24.- Drake (Inglaterra) 25.- Kostalek (Checoslovaquia) 26.- Allemandi (Italia) Bican (Austria) Crooks (Inglaterra) Domingos da Guía (Brasil) Monzeglio (Italia) Nausch (Austria) Peucelle (Argentina) Quincoces (España) Schiavio (Italia) Svoboda (Checoslovaquia) 36.- Szepan (Alemania) 37.- Carter (Inglaterra) Lawton (Inglaterra) 39.- Binder (Austria) 40.- Blenkinsop (Inglaterra) Combi (Italia) Cseh (Hungría) De la Mata, Vicente (Argentina) García, Diego (Argentina) Guaita (Argentina) Jack (Inglaterra) Lángara (España) Puc (Checoslovaquia) Varallo (Argentina) Zischek (Austria)
Accumulating the first two decades of the work of Tom Stevens and ordering the players from highest to lowest score, this would be the ranking between 1920 and 1939. As a curiosity, Europeans: 72.2% (British: 27.8%, Central European: 37%); South Americans: 27.8% (Argentines: 15.7%; Uruguayans: 7.4%). 1.- Meazza Italia 2.- Sindelar Austria 3.- Pesek Checoslovaquia 4.- Gallacher, Hugh Escocia 5.- Morton Escocia 6.- Scarone Uruguay 7.- Orsi Argentina 8.- Andrade Uruguay 9.- Sarosi Hungría 10.- Erico Paraguay 11.- Bastin Inglaterra 12.- Jackson, Alex Escocia 13.- Nejedly Checoslovaquia 14.- Buchan Inglaterra 15.- Dean Inglaterra 16.- Walker, Billy Inglaterra 17.- Zamora, Ricardo España 18.- Nasazzi Uruguay 19.- Orth Hungría 20.- Jack Inglaterra 21.- Braine Bélgica 22.- Petrone Uruguay 23.- Ferrari Italia Sastre Argentina 25.- James, Alex Inglaterra 26.- Hapgood Inglaterra 27.- McGrory Escocia 28.- Piola Italia Samitier España 30.- Avar Hungría 31.- Monti Argentina 32.- Planicka Checoslovaquia 33.- Seoane Argentina 34.- Moreno Argentina 35.- Puc Checoslovaquia 36.- Braun, Jozsef Hungría Friedenreich Brasil 38.- Schiavio Italia 39.- Ferreyra, Bernabé Argentina Zsengeller Hungría 41.- Wilson, Andy Escocia 42.- Andreolo Uruguay Konrad, Kalman Hungría 44.- Leónidas Brasil 45.- Brook Inglaterra 46.- Drake Inglaterra Schall Austria Takacs, Jozsef Hungría 49.- Libonatti Argentina 50.- Cherro Argentina 51.- Morris Inglaterra 52.- Kostalek Checoslovaquia Svoboda Checoslovaquia 54.- Ferreira, Manuel Argentina 55.- Blenkinsop Inglaterra 56.- Allemandi Italia Bican Austria Crooks Inglaterra Domingos da Guía Brasil Monzeglio Italia Nausch Austria Neco Brasil Peucelle Argentina Quincoces España 65.- Goodall Inglaterra 66.- Meiklejohn Escocia Molnar Hungría Stephenson, Clem Inglaterra Szepan Alemania Tarasconi Argentina 71.- Baloncieri Italia Carter Inglaterra Lawton Inglaterra Romano Uruguay 75.- Varallo Argentina 76.- Binder Austria 77.- Alcántara España 78.- Brown, George Inglaterra Caricaberry Argentina Chambers, Harry Inglaterra Combi Italia Cseh Hungría De la Mata, Vicente Argentina García, Diego Argentina Guaita Argentina Kelly Inglaterra Kohut Hungría Kolenaty Checoslovaquia Lángara España Wieser Austria Zischek Austria 92.- Lehner Alemania 93.- Blum Austria 94.- Amílcar Brasil Benítez Cáceres Paraguay Davies, Len Gales De Vecchi Italia Ferguson, Hughie Escocia García, Enrique Argentina Janda Checoslovaquia McStay Escocia Petit, René Francia Piendibene Uruguay Rimmer Inglaterra Rydell Suecia Scott, Elisha Irlanda del Norte Sesta Austria Smistik Austria
???? Zidane finished 9th that year, hardly losing to Owen, I do admit Owen was very very lucky to win and Raul, Figo and maybe an other couple had a stronger case.
Lucky or not it still doesn’t explain the 7 other players who finished ahead of Zidane when he was supposedly in the middle of his peak Zidane had the platform and the support cast unlike George best to dominate and he did not and could not It’s a simple as that George best scored 20+ Goals(assists+dribbles?)consistently every season from the wing for a mid table team that won nothing from 69-72 Now just imagine he had been playing for team like Lippis juventus and his goals has been scored in the context of winning and challenging for trophies I have no doubt he would’ve been a multiple ballon D’Or winner and at least finished way more often in the top 5 most of these clips surely come from the 5 or so seasons peru classified as world class If so than no 5-6 season peak of Zidane touches this not even remotely
Di Stefano interview with Marcela Mora y Araujo in 2008: "You know, they're always busting my balls with this - 'pick a favourite, pick the best' - that once I said 'OK, here's five names and then I'm saying no more: Muñoz, Moreno, Pedernera, Labruna and Lostau'", reciting the legendary River Plate front line-up as if it were one name.
I was not arguing the Best fact, totally agree, United were on a massive decline in the early 70s that ultimately resulted in relegation, my point was more the fact that Zidane was not biggest challenge to (a fortunate) Owen for the Ballon d'or. An example would be Zidane had just two ESM team of month performances in 00-01 season as opposed to 5 97-98. Two appearances in ESM team of month that season is less than other midfielders such as Nedved, Scholl and Medieta for example. Not a midfielder I know but I always thought Crespo's 00/01 season is vastly overrated.
Thought a bit about Ademir da Guia. In 1972 he was the 2nd highest rated player by Placar and his team won the championship so there are results to back it up. I mean... how would you possibly NOT include him? Looks similar in 1973. Won the title again, best attacker/midfielder on his team.